209 West Olympia, LLC v. Westchester Surplus Lines Insurance Company

United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida

209 West Olympia, LLC v. Westchester Surplus Lines Insurance Company

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION

209 West Olympia, LLC,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No: 2:24-cv-00237-JLB-KCD

Westchester Surplus Lines Insurance Company,

Defendant. / ORDER The Magistrate Judge has entered a Report and Recommendation (Doc. 47), recommending that Defendant’s Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement And To Stay Litigation (Doc. 28) be denied. No party has objected, and the time to do so has expired. A district judge may accept, reject, or modify the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation.

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1). The district judge must “make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.”

Id.

Florida law requires that an attorney’s authority to settle on behalf of his or her client be “clear and unequivocal.” Nehleber v. Anzalone,

345 So. 2d 822, 823

(Fla. 4th DCA 1977). Plaintiff claims that its attorney did not have authority to settle the case with Defendant. (Doc. 29). During an evidentiary hearing on the issue, Defendant gave evidence that Plaintiff’s attorney settled the case via email. (Doc. 45-4). This is insufficient to enforce the settlement because no evidence was presented showing that Plaintiffs attorney had permission from Plaintiff to settle the case on the terms in the email. In fact, Plaintiffs attorney admitted that he settled the case without first speaking with Plaintiff. (Doc. 29 at { 7). Here, after an independent review of the entire record and noting that no objection has been filed, the Court finds that the thorough and well-reasoned Report and Recommendation is due to be adopted. Because of the delay caused by this issue, the Court will issue a new scheduling order for the parties to complete discovery. Accordingly, itis ORDERED that: 1. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 47) is ADOPTED and made a part of this Order for all purposes. 2. Defendant’s Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement (Doc. 28) is DENIED. ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida, on February 28, 2025.

LS JOHN L. BADALAMENTI UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Reference

Status
Unknown